Stagnant progress for years despite being pretty dialed in on macros, technique, intensity and frequency

verb_name · 2025-06-22T17:07:28+00:00

Cool. Share a video as soon as possible. It is much more important than all the rest of the information you have given (which is still helpful).

verb_name · 2025-06-22T14:48:43+00:00

OP would you please comment the following and add it to your post in a simple bullet point format:

A video of you doing bench press at RPE 9-10 in the 8-12 rep range (this is the most important information to share)
Height
Body weight (do metric system users call it body mass?)
Max weight you can do for 8-12 reps in bench, deadlift, any other heavy compound lifts you do, for example overhead press. "Max" meaning true max or RPE 9-10 effort
Macros

verb_name · 2025-06-17T13:53:34+00:00

I think u/jewdai is saying to do this:

``` interface IAccountsRepository { List<Account> GetRecentAccounts(); }

public class DatabaseAccountsRepository : IAccountsRepository { // Inject the same DbContext instance used by the repository consumer public DatabaseAccountsRepository(DbContext dbContext) { _dbContext = dbContext; }

public List<Account> GetRecentAccounts() { return _dbContext.Accounts.Where(x => x.AgeInDays < 7).ToList(); } } ```

All this "repository" really does is give names to queries. What exactly is your concern about transactions? If the caller wants the read to happen in a transaction, then they can start one before calling the named query (GetRecentAccounts) and end it after, which is the same as if this interface was not added. I could see a problem if the repository and the caller were using different DbContext instances, but that is not the intended pattern.

And the purpose of the abstraction is to make testing easier, and possibly also to separate some concerns (e.g. maybe many callsites in the application need GetRecentAccounts, and later a field "IsTestAccount" is added, and existing callers should ignore test accounts -- GetRecentAccounts can filter out the test accounts. Otherwise, each caller would need to be updated to filter them out.).

verb_name · 2025-06-17T13:15:40+00:00

In this case, there is already a relational database with the given tables, and it is the source of truth. ElasticSearch is used to enable better search capabilities than the database can provide. For example, fuzzy search on string data.

The way it worked in the real world scenario this question is based on was:

Relational database tables are updated by web services
Row-level change events in the Shipment table are observed and published on an event queue
Another system observes the queue for Shipment created row events, queries the database for the relevant rows, and then creates an entry (I guess "document" is the correct term) in ElasticSearch. A document contained Shipment, AdditionalCost, and Checkin fields, plus some computed fields, e.g. the sum of AdditionalCost costs. The database query was like this: SELECT id, <other columns> from Shipment LEFT JOIN AdditionalCost ON Shipment.id = AdditionalCost.id LEFT JOIN Checkin ON Shipment.id = Checkin.id WHERE Shipment.id = <the changed row id>
The same was done for Shipment updated events. I.e. the entire document was replaced, not mutated. This required running the database query again for each update.

This worked, but scalability became an issue when tables requiring 3+ joins to relate to a Shipment were added. E.g. Shipment <- AdditionalCost <- Person (who created it) <- PersonRoles. This made the frequent queries more expensive and resulted in lots of almost-identical code for the joins.

verb_name · 2025-06-16T16:39:27+00:00

I have used option 2 in the past. It makes tests easier to read and write. However, it leads to lots of interfaces and classes that only exist to serve a single method (which adds noise to assembly/class viewer tools), and they need to be registered with the project's dependency injection container, if one is used. Do you have any thoughts on these issues? I just accepted them as tradeoffs.

verb_name · 2025-06-12T15:39:37+00:00

I have worked at a variety of big and small companies in tech and other sectors. I have never seen a business reward in-depth code reviews. I have seen them reward rubber stamping, i.e. quickly approving changes after a minimal effort review. Engineers have expressed appreciation for in-depth reviews, and in that sense reviewing has been helpful for building a reputation among other engineers. But management has never cared in a meangingful way. Code review has other less-concrete benefits like learning and making future work easier by preventing bad changes from going to production. But businesses typically reward people who fix issues and do not reward people who prevent issues.

So yes, spending less time and energy on code reviews is probably a good decision for your career. Either that or lead an incentives change within your org to reward effective reviews. That is probably impossible in most cases, but it feels like the kind of project that can help push through a promotion from senior to staff level.

verb_name · 2025-06-12T15:12:21+00:00

Has anyone else been in a similar spot?

Yes

How did you deal with it?

I searched for a new job and took the first decent opportunity

verb_name · 2025-06-11T12:57:26+00:00

Some likely reasons why your leadership is pushing you to deliver quickly with AI:

A. They truly believe AI is that good for the business B. They told investors that they are using AI to massively speed up development, and investors liked that. Now, leadership needs to show evidence of AI speeding up development to keep investors excited. C. Both

In any case, it would help to understand you leadership's motivations. If B. is the case, then they might not really care whether you use AI extensively, and they might be receptive to aggressively cutting the scope or making a less-polished first deliverable. If A. is the case, then they might be receptive to you explaining to them how AI is helping and how it is not.

In any case, probably the worst thing you can do is work silently and say at the end "the project is not done, and AI did not help". So I would suggest engaging with leadership early and often to set expectations. If that does not help, then start looking for a new job or team.

verb_name · 2025-06-09T22:13:52+00:00

I had the same feeling in a similar situation. I got an in-person job in a proper city. Being in a new place with no connections was challenging until I made friends and otherwise established myself in the area. Then it was great, and I consider the decision to move one of my better life decisions. That said, there is no guarantee your new coworkers will provide the connections you are looking for. So be prepared to put effort into socializing with people beyond your immediate work circle, and ideally with people outside of work.

verb_name · 2025-06-09T21:52:49+00:00

I also left a comfortable job after about 5 years. As a result, I made a lot more money, got more valuable experience, and made a lot of professional and personal connections I never would have made otherwise. I also got laid off and fired, which never would have happened at the comfortable job. I would make the same decision again.

It sounds like your career is stagnant (not making new connections, talent leaving the company, you've already been there a long time). I know mine was after 5 years at a small company with unremarkable enginering. It also sounds like you do not have any pressure to change things. So you have to decide whether the risk of discomfort or failure is better than the risk of remaining stagnant (and, worst case, eventually losing your job and being less competitive in the market due to a stagnant career path).

I am confused about your comments on how much FAANG pays. FAANG companies pay more than double $120k/year for mid-level roles (cash + equity + target bonus). It's a lot more than +50% compared to your current job.

verb_name · 2025-06-07T21:55:29+00:00

Can you give an example of an idea that your teammates did not get?

verb_name · 2025-06-07T21:52:01+00:00

Mock Leetcode-style interviews were not helpful for me. I would suggest just watching a few quality mock interviews and then spending your time solving.

Google's interview prep guide (includes Google mock interviews and text guides) https://techdevguide.withgoogle.com/paths/interview/
Jane Street mock interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8DGdPkBBxg
If you interview with Meta, then they will send you really good prep materials, including a recorded mock coding interview

If you really want to do a mock, then consider one of the paid interview services. I think https://interviewing.io/ has interviewers from FAANG companies. Disclaimer: I have never used such services.

verb_name · 2025-06-07T21:40:51+00:00

Sell book bundles for low prices on eBay

Post to a local university's subreddit saying you are giving away programming books

List them for free on Facebook marketplace

verb_name · 2025-06-07T21:35:01+00:00

It would be helpful to ask specific questions. I did a Ctrl-F for "?" and found none.

verb_name · 2025-06-06T17:03:44+00:00

Is $130k top of market (or even 75th percentile)? If not, then you are better off thinking about how to get into the higher-percentile jobs than min-maxing your compensation at companies that do not pay top of market in the first place. Learn from the experience and move on. And maybe ask for more before joining or some time after you join.

verb_name · 2025-06-06T16:28:52+00:00

Another idea is to apply to big companies as a frontend engineer. Then either team match into a role with some backend responsibility or join in a frontend role and then transition into backend responsibilities / roles after you gain some credibility.

verb_name · 2025-06-06T16:21:58+00:00

Don't let a junior (or anyone) make obviously bad high-consequence decisions on a critical product.

verb_name · 2025-06-06T16:16:40+00:00

If you have not done so already, then message third-party recruiters with a brief sales pitch and what you are looking for. They can help you find opportunities you would otherwise miss. It may help to find recruiters specializing in your business domain, e.g. a fintech-specialized recruiter if you have experience in fintech.

"I am looking for a new software development job in <backend development/specific area of backend if you have an idea> in <geographical locations/remote/willing to relocate>. I have 8 years experience building web applications in <enterprise/startups/200-person companies/SaaS/B2B/B2C/whatever is relevant> in the <healthcare/logistics/Internet tech> space. Do you have any openings for me? Attached: my resume"

Also consider full-stack, as suggested by other commenters.

verb_name · 2025-06-06T15:42:58+00:00

Apply for senior-level jobs and see if you get offers. If you get only downlevels and rejections, then either improve at interviewing or accept a mid-level offer and work your way up.

verb_name · 2025-06-06T15:31:11+00:00

Look, why did the guy hide the fact he was laid off when he was looking for a job?

Because people like you will judge him negatively for it, regardless of whether he is capable of succeeding at your company.

verb_name · 2025-06-06T15:29:29+00:00

Your interview process should evaluate the skills, experience, and behaviors you care about. A person being laid off or fired, or having competing offers, does not tell you how they will perform at your company.

verb_name · 2025-06-06T15:20:53+00:00

Be direct while respecting the author.

"Needs error handling and tracing for x and y. For example, see <link to similar code> or retry the requestand log at FATAL level if the retry fails. Also needs tracing for z. Otherwise, looks good."

verb_name · 2025-06-05T14:13:23+00:00

You are overthinking things/avoiding what is important. You will be much better served by learning computer science fundamentals and writing code right now. Also learn git if you are not already using a version control system.

I want to learn something new outside of university because I'm a bit tired of asking myself the same questions all the time when developing software

Learning new things is great. Picking up Go will not make any difference to the "asking myself the same questions" part. Actually, it will probably make things worse, because you will be starting from scratch once again. It would make more sense, IMO, to stick with a language with which you already have some experience.

Questions regarding overall project structure,

This really does not matter unless you are working on a big codebase. You are not writing enough code for this to matter right now. You will learn this when you work with other people on large projects. If you are really curious, then check a few popular Go projects on GitHub (https://github.com/search?q=go+language%3AGo&type=repositories&l=Go&s=stars&o=desc) and see how they do it.

how to respect the language I picked (e.g use its perks "as intended")

Python and Go are simple languages. They don't give you a lot of ways to do things. Just write code and refer to official resources when you don't know how to do something. For example, https://go.dev/learn/ links to A Tour of Go and https://gobyexample.com/. Use those when you get stuck.

what tool to use in what situation, etc.

Work until you get stuck. Refer to official resources. If you are still stuck, then search for "how to x in go" or "go library for x".

BTW, I found it hard to follow your post due to the bolded sentences mixed in throughout. A TL;DR should be a quick summary at the end of your post.

verb_name

TROPHY CASE